The Hippopotamus (2017) User Reviews

An Amusing Trifle

[Minnesota_Reid · 7/10 · 30 April 2017]

A long time ago, our hero was a respected poet, but the muse has long ago abandoned him. Now he is a drunken theater critic whose high jinks, while amusing, are out of control and cost him his job.

A young woman hires him to look into a miracle worker, who happens to be our hero's godson. While a dyed-in-the-wool skeptic, our man needs the money and take the job. It's also a trip to his past, and he has to cross bridges that were burned decades before.

While the sum of the movie is much less than the sum of its parts, the parts are often quite witty. The lead is well played by the excellent Roger Allam.

The movie was taken from a book by Stephen Fry, of "Blackadder" and "Jeeves and Wooster" fame.

Horsing around

[begob · 6/10 · 21 July 2017]

A clapped out poet brings his powers of perception to an English country house acclaimed for its miraculous cures, and finds more than he bargained for ...

Lovely doff of the cap to English detective fiction, although it finds much humour in declining to avert its gaze from the nonsense of the convention. The theme of miracle cures is important, so the one scene of emotion toward the end matters a lot - I didn't feel it, maybe because the moment of death was never addressed thematically. Hey - it's a country estate, built on the deaths of others.

The pace and humour are good, and the hero is perfectly smashed and detached. The weakness is in the supporting characters - not the performances, but their drama and the necessity of their presence. No great turns or lines, and I guess that's down to the original writing.

Music and sets are gorgeous, editing keeps it clipping along.

Overall: Insightful and entertaining, not so dramatic.

funny-not family friendly

[graceshropshire-32595 · 7/10 · 5 January 2019]

Not trying to bash Stephen here. Love the guy. Amazing writer. I'm 16 and I recently watched this with my parents and 13 year old brother. 15 rated films are normally at the right level of inappropriate yet comfortable for us all to watch and enjoy together. However, although this film was very funny, the narration was thoroughly entertaining and even the story was clever and engaging, it was just slightly disturbing. My parents checked the parent notes before watching and I have to say, they really didn't prepare us for the endeavour to come. Nevertheless we laughed along and just discussed that parts were not to be spoken about outside our front room. I would say DO NOT WATCH THIS WITH KIDS UNDER 15 OR 16. Also it uses the c word like 3 times just an fyi.

Quaintly captivating, but read the book first.

[billovalley · 15 March 2019]

Interesting case study of the old 'adapting-a-novel to-film' quandary. As usual, the first impression you get is that they've fallen between two stools - taken a subtly crafted and nuanced story and brainstormed how to make it a hit with the daytime-movie-of-the-week crowd. In respect of that ambition, it belly-flops as they almost always do. The not immediately likeable anti-hero's voice-overs rescue it to a large extant, and the unexpected and slightly mind-boggling revelation of the real mechanics behind the supposed miracles also shifts gears and jolts you into a certain reappraisal of what has gone before. It definitely references two films I've seen - "Rueben, Rueben" (1983), for the amusing, lecherous, literary drunk, and "Equus" (1977), for reasons you'd better watch both films to learn. Enjoy it as a curio. Films of unfilmable books are at least interesting celluloid oxymorons. How else could it have been done? One option would have been as a faithful, dutiful transcript of the novel - like the 1981 TV production of 'Brideshead Revisited' - but I don't think budget would have covered that. Maybe - if I were a 'suit' and in charge - scrap all the POV soliloquys - just strip it to the plot and build an Agatha Christie "Poirot' style detective story around that. The actual bones of the plot are strong enough to survive this sort of re-fleshing. But then, I'm not responsible to a boss for ginormous amounts of money spent. Let's not judge. It's definitely a movie that will make you think. Not just a slab of pre-processed Hollywood audience-feed, anyway.

Delightful hidden gem

[garymathe-76173 · 7/10 · 11 June 2021]

I could feel Stephen Fry in the leading role, that's how good Roger Allam is. He also carried the movie through the slow beginning. The story is intriguing, fun, sad, and happy, all at the same time. It's a shame I hadn't heard of it until I happened upon it while browsing the free section of Amazon Prime. Well worth a watch, as long as one is not very religious or uptight.

Shame that everyone will miss this film

[digdog-785-717538 · 7/10 · 23 July 2017]

The Hippopotamus is based on a novel written by our local boy Stephen Fry, and that should tell you a lot about it, but it probably won't.

The story is of Ted Wallace (Roger Allam), an old poet, brilliant despite his toxic personality and propensity for whisky. Fired from his job as theater critic, he meets an old acquaintance who proposes him an unusual job, to investigate the mysterious going-ons at an estate of a family he used to be friends with .. before he destroyed their relationship in a drunken fit.

And Ted sets out to do his Teddish usual, but, being the perceptive soul he is, and fundamentally still a good man, he lays off the booze and unravels the mystery of Swifton Hall.

The film is structured in the manner of the old Poirot films, with less focus on the mystery, and more on the interaction between the characters, and more importantly, class conflict, of which the film ... well, has some.

The Hippopotamus is not a great film, i won't lie to you. It was a bad choice to pick this particular novel for the adaptation, because the story isn't really interesting and there aren't enough memorably moments, no great face-offs.

The book itself was never meant to be a mystery thriller, but rather, a book of poems written in novel form.

And the dialogue in The Hippopotamus is of absolutely stellar quality. It is, we could say, la raison d'être of the film, in its role of merely a platform for Fry's masterful compositions of the English language.

As for the production, i found the soundtrack to the severely lacking. The film adaptation also demands a rewrite and some decent direction, and while this may require Effort(tm) i don't see why we need to stop at simply filming theater, since that's the very opposite of why films exist.

You should watch The Hippopotamus, it's very well acted (with Roger Allen in top shape), occasionally funny, and contains at least one memorable line, but if you do watch it don't expect to be amazed; once the words hit the screen, you'll realize it's still only a book, and not A FILM.

7.5/10 - if you want to do better, learn to use the camera.

Worth a watch.

[deloudelouvain · 6/10 · 5 June 2018]

Don't expect a hilarious comedy or so because it isn't but there are some funny moments, especially by the spoken words. You can clearly hear Stephen Fry speaking through Ted Wallace, a waterfall of words, sometimes harsh and sometimes funny. Ted Wallace did a good job playing his character, a lost soul that drinks way too much, investigating what could be a miracle curer. The rest of the cast all contributed in their way to the story. A story that might not be for everybody, like the reviews and ratings clearly shows, but if now and then you like the complexity of the English language instead of the usual stuff you might enjoy this movie. It's worth watching once in my opinion.

Worth your time.

[Sleepin_Dragon · 7/10 · 12 March 2022]

This is a beautifully well made, extraordinary well acted movie. I would argue it's quite a high brow watch, but then you should be expecting that.

There isn't exactly a plot of sorts, other than someone is hired to solve a series of mysteries, other than that it just seems to be a series of random occurrences.

The visuals are really nice, great location work, and an incredible setting.

The characters are larger than life let's say, the best element for me was the acting of the ever wonderful Roger Allam.

It feels very disjointed in parts, but overall it's definitely worth your time, the dialogue is wonderful at times.

Worth seeing, 7/10.

Thoroughly Enjoyed This Movie

[PutuNix · 9/10 · 21 July 2017]

I was worried I might be disappointed by this movie because of the negative reviews, but that worry was ill-founded. I thoroughly enjoyed it from start to finish and thought it well-found the balance between absurdity, pathos and grit.

I could hear the literary voice of Stephen Fry throughout, especially in the outpourings of the protagonist. The words sizzled and danced and revealed a certain realistic sensitivity.

I am not associated in any way with anyone involved in the film.

Tedious-English

[RickManhattan · 6/10 · 2 October 2017]

This trifle fails to convince. The story is contrived and the deus ex machina is not appealing. Throw in a bit of raunchy teen-cream excitement to attract voyeurs, and there you go. The performances are good, although each character is stock. If you're on a plane this is worth seeing but don't pay for it.

Coarse and not particularly humorous attempt at a raunchy comedy of mismanners

[jamesrupert2014 · 3/10 · 1 September 2017]

Despite the promising premise and cast, I found the "The Hippopotamus" to be very disappointing. Much of the 'humour' came from Roger Allam's foul-mouthed muttering and yelling. A little bit goes a long way and (IMO) incessant profanity in a comedy is usually sign of a lacklustre script (like third-rate stand-up - if you're not funny, yell 'F---' a lot and hope for cheap laughs). The story, which finds Allam's obnoxious washed-up poet "investigating" claims of miraculous cures at a country estate starts off promisingly but then degenerates into a series of embarrassing sex-sight-gags. Given that this was based on a book by the talented Stephan Fry and included some fine British comic actors (e.g. Tim McInnerny was great in the Blackadder series), "The Hippopotamus" was a real let-down.

Thoroughly enjoyable

[abbiedog2 · 10/10 · 28 September 2017]

This is a thoroughly enjoyable film. Surfing Netflix for something decent to watch when I chanced upon The Hippopotomus, having not heard of it. What a nice surprise! Delightfully funny and tender, without being soppy. The narrative was pure Frye wit...brilliant...smart and so funny. So nice to not be bored by stupid slapstick, but laugh out loud at the fab script. I just loved this film.

Witless

[ferdinand1932 · 1/10 · 19 July 2017]

What a demonstration of Fry's weaknesses as a writer: the quasi-Evelyn Waugh story; the undergraduate reflections on life and love; the vulgarity to shock and seek a laugh. The terrible news is that this is not funny at all, not even wrily in and English with a gin and tonic bone-dry drollness funny: in fact, it's witless and boring.

But it's worse than that: it is a lousy pastiche of a third rate 1930s novel written by some forgotten hack who went to a minor public school and then never published another book. Hence the cheap and common jibes about writing and publishing, mostly true too, but nonetheless dull as the proverbial ditch water to hear served up again.

The film adds a voice over to give the audience the musings and assorted drunken drivel from the author protagonist, who is a crumpled forgettable middle-aged man of no discernible attributes.

The plot tests the audiences' patience and good humor with its series of jokes about emissions deliberately designed to upset sensitive aunties. It wastes the talents of all involved and must be considered an elaborate tax avoidance scheme conceived in order to lose money.

Won't blow your mind but is perfectly formed

[thekarmicnomad · 8/10 · 16 May 2018]

A drunk, washed-up poet is hired to solve a family mystery.

The main character is a highly literate pompous old fellow struggling with his own existence. A lot of the comedy comes from him insulting people using very long words, which I found very amusing.

There is not a lot to this movie. Don't expect dramatic plot twists, edge of the seat action, moving performances or fire works of any kind. But this film achieves what it sets out to do perfectly!

This film is gentle, interesting, funny and quite refreshing.

This is definitely a Sunday afternoon watch, but for that time slot it is perfect! Production, acting, script are all exceptional!

This film hasn't tried to reach too far and it pays off dividends.

Watch this after your Sunday roast with a drink for a perfect afternoon.

Archetypical Lukewarm English Comedy

[gerbildad · 2/10 · 21 July 2017]

Seeing as Stephen Fry with his gentility and wit is my favourite atheist (though he does have his moments), I had high hopes for this movie.

What a disappointment. It proved to be a typical example of a type of English film full of unlikable stock-standard characters (the grumpy old curmudgeon, the ditsy blonde, the brash, rude American, the goofy, horny adolescent, the ineffectual older brother, and of course the requisite gay man). Combine that with a lustreless script sprinkled with the usual assortment of unpleasant details (I'll spare you the spoilers) and almost devoid of laughs, and you've got a waste of two hours.

I gave it a generous 2 because the acting was good.

Somebody must like movies like this because they keep making them, but if that's not your cup of tea spare yourself the anguish.

The Hippopotamus

[drhall-672-138129 · 10/10 · 23 July 2017]

The Best Movie you will see this year ... maybe, ever. Mystery movie, comedy, philosophy, how often does this caliber of film come along? Not a single wasted line, not a single flop character, this script has something for everyone. Intellectual Entertainment film has become a rare commodity, tight well written scripts, impeccable line direction and cast delivered lines accompanied by spot-on timing have become a thing of the past. Photography is perfect. I don't give tens ... This is a ten.

Tedious waste of time

[crabsky · 2/10 · 25 August 2017]

The pompous arrogance and traits of Stephen Fry come blaring through at you this entire movie. The verbose lavatorial narrative was actually quite wearying and excessive to the point that it became irritating. The attempted 'humour' was dull and boring, I don't believe I was brought to laughter once. Fry's own slanted view of women and sex is brash to say the least, along with weak characters and dialogue, dare I go on..

Honestly, I was expecting to sit down and watch an entertaining British comedy however was sorely unimpressed.

No Hippos were harmed in the making of this movie

[ajack-19783 · 8/10 · 10 October 2020]

A lovely film, very good story which you would expect from a movie based on a Stephen Fry novel. Roger Allam is brilliant as always and the supporting cast a joy. The film may not to be to everyone's taste and some of the scenes are not for people who may be easily offended. Make yourself a cup of tea, get some nibbles and settle down to watch a well written and well acted fim.

A confused film

[valleyjohn · 5/10 · 22 October 2017]

This a strange one. Adapted from a Stephen Fry novel this film is a hard one to pigeon hole. It starts off as a comedy with some Malcolm Tucker ( The thick of it ) like scenes played brilliantly by Roger Allam it then turns into a stately home farce and ends up being like a detective mystery story. Its the story of a drunken poet and theatre critic who loses his job and then agrees to investigate goings on at Swafford Manor where so called miracles are being performed. I enjoyed the performances in this especially from Roger Allam but the film itself left me a little cold probably because I couldn't really relate to the people in it plus it was a little too high brow for my liking. As soon a poetry is mentioned , which it is several times , I tend to glaze over and lose interest. If you are into the old Agatha Christie movies I can see how this might appeal but it wasn't for me.

Delightful British nonsense

[rps-2 · 9/10 · 11 October 2018]

If you dislike or don't understand British humour, you'll rate this a 1. But if you accept the fact that the Brits are all a bit mad --- I mean,who else could have dreamt up Monty Python? --- you will enjoy it immensely: the totally absurd story, the British prototypes, the brilliantly rich and round use of the English language. Having said that, there was excessive and unnecessary use of the"'f word" If you don't understand British humour, there is no way to explain it.But if you do, you'll love this film and consider it a masterpiece of the genre. l

So disappointing

[hotstonemassage · 1/10 · 4 June 2017]

Was expecting so much better from R.Allam. His talent totally wasted on this putrefying portrayal of garbage. There is simply no rational need to offer "entertainment" of this caliber. If there is any motivation to try to influence an audience to accept nausea-inducing torridness along with cynicism about spiritual gifts it's failed miserably. Fry is allowing himself to be used by forces he doesn't understand.

Highly enjoyable

[a_mobbs · 9/10 · 13 February 2019]

Something different and really enjoyable. Black comedy, with a great cast. Great viewing for a winters evening.

At least Fry uses good grammar

[Pedant-skewer · 25 September 2017]

I read the reviews but have so far only watched the beginning of the film. I have to agree with cosmix 10 that Fry is marmite to the palate: you either love his or hate him. Sadly I fall into the latter category and cannot abide the man's work and probably wouldn't like him either if we ever met..

That said, cosmix 10 needs to learn better use of English. It is: "Might as well have been", or "Might as will've been" but not "Might as well of been".

Similarly: "probably could have worked", or "probably could've worked" but definitely not "probably could of worked".

I point out these things not just because I am a pedant, (which of course I am)but for your own good. Fry will read your review and laugh at you as an uneducated numbskull. If you want to really upset him, then write grammar as good or better than his own.

As for the Hippopotamus? Given that the homoerotic bath scene at the beginning, was followed almost immediately by the homoerotic stage play immediately afterwards, this somehow tells me it is probably not a film for me.

(PS to Fry: The reference to the 1980 stage play "The Romans in Britain", with its famous homosexual rape scene that provoked a law suit from Mary Whitehouse, was not lost. However, you may be surprised to hear it, but most people in Britain and America are not gay. Hence your film bombed even if you thought such references were clever. Pleas learn from your mistakes).

I wasted my time...don't waste yours.

[kmerwin-81-599131 · 1/10 · 29 August 2017]

I cannot recommend this movie for many reasons. I will list three:

The dialogue..."blah, blah, blah, cuss, cuss, cuss...blah, blah, blah, cuss, cuss, cuss."

It's focus on destroying any hope or faith at all was disturbing. Disrespecting and ridiculing throughout.

The theme of "how sexually disgusting can I be... all set in a beautiful English countryside" was a constant. And truthfully, it just got old...it's like the writer was stuck on the same merry-go-round of: disgust, rude, offense, sexual baseness, cuss....but with an English

accent to make it sound really brilliant. Well, don't be deceived, it was not.

I wasted my time...don't waste yours.

would have been 10 if it was closer to the novel

[sirakusai · 10/10 · 4 August 2017]

Unfortunately, the movie is a far cry from the novel it is based on. The novel itself is pure genius. That said, The Hippopotamus is still an entertaining movie. Witty British humor combined with a clever plot, amusing characters top with a superb performance by the leading actor Roger Allam. I highly recommend this movie, but do yourself a favor and read the book, or better yet, listen to the Audiobook narrated by Stephan Fry himself - pure enjoyment. If your intellect is a little above an average movie that does not make a sense if you can understand humor and not just silly jokes, then you'll enjoy this movie.